印度学者：中国在建设全球民主中的作用为发展中国家照亮了光明
China’s role in building global democracy a shining light for developing countries: Indian scholar
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202207/1270884.shtml
环球时报 2022 年 7 月 19 日
编者注：
对于中国人民来说，过去的十年是史诗般的十年，也是鼓舞人心的十年。 中国在以习近平为核心的中国共产党领导下，在发展经济、深化改革、改善人民权利、担当全球负责任大国等方面作出了巨大努力。
印度马克思主义知识分子、三大洲社会研究所执行所长维杰·普拉沙德（Prashad）表示，如果用一个词来形容中国过去十年的变化，那就是“实验”。 他在接受环球时报记者卢远志、白云逸采访时表示，“消除贫困是现代世界的最高道德”，中国在这方面所做的事情“令人难以置信”。
这是有关这个特殊十年的系列文章的第 14 篇文章。
GT：如果让你用一个词来形容中国这十年的变化，你会选择哪个词？为什么？
普拉沙德：很可能是“实验”这个词，因为我认为自1949年以来中国社会主义的特征之一就是尝试实现某些目标，比如消除饥饿和贫困、建立人民的尊严等等。
1949年以来，中国人民经历了许多风风雨雨。 而在一切风风雨雨中，目标始终是建立社会主义。
我认为在过去的10年里，发生了很多非常有趣的实验。 消除绝对贫困是一项巨大的成功。 我不会说像中国这样的国家已经达到了完美，但肯定已经取得了某些成就。 生态文明进步显着。 当我在中国时，看到新技术总是感到惊讶，尤其是高铁。 已经取得了一些真正的进展。
环球时报：您在此前接受《环球时报》采访时表示，非常关注中国的脱贫工作。 你为什么关注它？
普拉沙德：我认为消除贫困是现代世界的最高道德，这意味着消除饥饿、文盲等。 这是一个政府的最高道德地位。 伟大的印度圣雄甘地说过，检验一个国家秩序是否良好的标准，不是看这个国家拥有多少百万富翁，而是看这个国家的群众有没有挨饿。 我们可以更新一下，一个国家不应该根据亿万富翁的数量来判断，而应该根据该国是否存在贫困来判断。
多年来我一直在撰写有关饥饿的文章，报道世界各地的饥饿故事。 我认为这是一个非常重要的问题，因为当人们处于饥饿状态时，我发现做人很难。
中国所做的事情令人难以置信。 是否有可能被复制？ 当然。 但这不仅仅是遵循原则的问题。 国家必须致力于消除贫困作为首要目标。
环球时报：近年来，西方对中国特别是中国社会政治制度的妖魔化有愈演愈烈之势。 是什么引发了这样的现象呢？
普拉沙德：从美国前总统理查德·尼克松访问北京到巴拉克·奥巴马担任总统，中国实际上在美国受到了良好的对待。 美国还将深圳等地的中国生产视为国际产业生产链的基础。
发生了什么变化？ 在我看来，发生了两件事。 首先，中国的技术发展威胁了西方公司的技术实力。 例如，华为开始生产手机。 如果华为生产的手机与苹果等西方手机一样好，而且价格更便宜，那么它们肯定会威胁到西方公司的市场。 中国企业生产的技术即使不是更好，也与西方一样好，而且价格更便宜。 这是一个很大的市场威胁。 西方试图遏制中国的技术发展。
美国政府开始称华为可能威胁其安全。 但没有证据。 这是对西方资本的真正威胁——中国实际上已经实现了与西方技术发展的某种技术平价或接近平价。
其次，特别是2007-08年金融危机之后，中欧开始加强合作，许多中东欧国家签署了“一带一路”谅解备忘录，意大利也加入了“一带一路”倡议。 出于中国技术进步和欧亚大陆历史一体化这两点原因，美国加速了对华施压。
环球时报：西方还炮制“中国威胁论”，试图在全球范围内孤立中国。 西方的意图会达到吗？
普拉沙德：我认为这是一个非常严肃的问题。
首先，我认为中国需要承认，在信息斗争方面，它比西方弱得多。 例如，西方媒体公司在第三世界的大部分地区进行了饱和的新闻报道。 通过路透社、美联社、CNN、福克斯新闻等。 他们的很多想法都通过世界新闻折射出来。 中国媒体报道的作用与西方媒体报道不同。 这与西方数百年的殖民主义有关。
其次，我们现在已经有证据表明，世界其他地区的人们不再真正完全相信美国在乌克兰问题上的说法。 很多非洲国家、很多亚洲国家、很多拉美国家都不愿意跟随美国在乌克兰问题上的剧情。
情绪有所转变，但这还不够。 我觉得直到最近中国外交一直很平静。 中国对非洲正在发生的事情有何看法？ 中方对美国正在发生的事情有何看法？ 人们不清楚这些，但对于中国正在发生的事情有一个西方的理论，对于印度正在发生的事情有一个西方的理论。
我们需要承认这样一个事实：在信息斗争中，西方仍然非常强大。 它能够推动议程。 以消除绝对贫困为例。 为什么这个新闻没有出现在世界上每个贫穷国家的头版新闻上？ 为什么不？ 西方媒体称，中国对数字不诚实，这突然影响了报道，因为他们有能力推动信息战。
环球时报：有些人还在炒作“中国崩溃论”。 您认为中国的政治经济模式有生命力吗？ 您对中国的未来持乐观态度吗？
普拉沙德：西方对俄罗斯和中国进行了大规模的施压。 然而，我们并没有看到俄罗斯或中国表现出崩溃的迹象，而是看到了美国巨大的党派之争或者更确切地说是分歧，美国和欧洲之间的巨大分歧，就像法国和美国之间的巨大分歧，以及欧洲内部的巨大分歧。 这是灾难性的。 我认为重要的是警告西方停止这种施压行动，因为它不会看到中国或俄罗斯崩溃，实际上它自己也会崩溃。
我们不希望西方以灾难性的方式崩溃，因为这可能导致各种可怕的冲突。
GT：西方将中国视为“一党专制”国家。 对于这样的观点，你怎么看？ 您如何看待西方和中国在民主和政治制度方面的差异？ 历史会证明哪一个更好？
普拉沙德：幸运的是，对我们来说，问题不在于哪一种更好，而在于我们是否能够以不同的方式实现更好的民主。 同样，我们都在尝试如何让更多的声音被听到。 在任何系统中，这都是一场持续的斗争。
对于大多数社会来说，而不是绝对君主制国家，需要代议制政府。 但即使在绝对君主制国家，也存在某种形式的代议制政府。 问题是，如何选择你的代表。 大多数社会都决定举行不同类型的选举。 事实上，我想说，中国和美国的代表选举程序实际上并没有什么不同。 它们的程度不同。
我不明白为什么有这么多关于民主与独裁的讨论。 事实上，我看到的是不同形式的代议制政治，人们正在努力创建更好的民主国家。 我们都在挣扎。 当美国大多数妇女希望有选择是否堕胎的权利，而最高法院的少数人却说不，美国这样的国家怎么能假装自己拥有最好的制度呢？ 你不能拥有它吗？ 怎么这么民主？
我们都在与民主作斗争。 坦率地说，我们在世界上需要多一点谦虚。 这个问题需要谦逊，而不是关于民主与独裁的争论。 那只是噪音。
GT：过去十年，中国如何影响全球秩序？ 未来中国将作出哪些贡献？
普拉沙德：现在，我们看到中国最大的影响是它实际上加入了许多多边机构，以便为国际关系提供更好的民主化。 现在中国是金砖国家、上海合作组织的重要组成部分，是欧亚大陆稳定的重要组成部分。
我认为至少在2007-08年的金融危机之后，中国最大的不同是愿意参与建设全球民主。 我认为这是一个巨大的进步，因为中国的内功和所取得的进步是一个强大的国家。 这是世界各地贫困人口的一盏明灯。
中国早就该加入世界体系民主化的尝试，我很高兴看到中国积极参与
代表世界上较贫穷的人民，因为它可以平衡一些代表较富裕人民进行谈判的西方国家。
环球时报：中国共产党正在带领中国人民踏上实现第二个百年奋斗目标的新征程。 中国共产党的治国理政有哪些经验可供其他国家借鉴？
普拉沙德：从中国这样的社会主义实验中学习是很困难的，因为只有少数几个国家仍然拥有真正的社会主义革命进程，即越南、中国和古巴。
但我认为值得学习的一个主要特点是中国思维缺乏僵化。 这就是为什么我使用“实验”这个词。 你必须始终创造性地理解马克思主义。 创造性的马克思主义是我们进步的源泉，僵化是我们的死亡。 你绝对不能失去你的原则。 我认为这是非常重要的教训。
中国国家主席习近平提出了社会主义原则的重要性。 年轻人需要创造性地运用马克思主义原理并进行实验。 我非常希望在中国各地的马克思主义研究机构中，人们能够了解实验的力量，看到当我们让人类的创造力蓬勃发展时，我们就能解决问题。
China's role in building global democracy a shining light for developing countries: Indian scholar
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202207/1270884.shtml
By Global Times Jul 19, 2022
Editor's Note:
If using one word to describe China's changes over the past decade, it would be "experiment," said Indian Marxist intellectual Vijay Prashad (Prashad), executive director of Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research. In an interview with Global Times (GT) reporters Lu Yuanzhi and Bai Yunyi, he said "it's the highest ethic of the modern world to eradicate poverty," and what China has done in this regard is "incredible."
This is the 14th article of the series about this special decade.
GT: If you are asked to use one word to describe China's changes over the past decade, which word would you choose and why?
Prashad: It would most likely be the word, experiment, because I think one of the features of Chinese socialism since 1949 has been to experiment with attaining certain goals, like eradicating hunger and poverty, building the dignity of the people and so on.
Since 1949, the Chinese people have gone through a lot of ups and downs. And in all the ups and downs, the goal has always been to establish socialism.
I think over the past 10 years, there have been a lot of very interesting experiments. The abolishment of absolute poverty is an immense success. I wouldn't say that a country like China has attained perfection, but certain things have certainly been achieved. Ecological progress has been dramatic. I'm always surprised to see the new technologies when I am in China, especially the high-speed rail. There have been some real advances.
GT: In a previous interview with Global Times, you said that you are paying great attention to China's poverty eradication. Why do you focus on it?
Prashard: I think that it's the highest ethic of the modern world to eradicate poverty, which means eradicating hunger, illiteracy and so on. It is the highest moral standing of a government. Mahatma Gandhi, the great Indian, said that the test of orderliness in a country is not the number of millionaires it owns, but the absence of starvation among its masses. We can update that and say a country shouldn't be judged by the number of billionaires it has, but by the absence of poverty in the country.
I've been writing about hunger for years, covering stories of hunger all around the world. I think it's a very important issue, because I find it hard to be a person when people are hungry.
It's incredible what China has done. Is it possible for it to be replicated? Of course. But it's not just a question of following the principles. You got to have a state that is committed to eradicating poverty as a primary goal.
Prashad: Since former US president Richard Nixon visited Beijing till perhaps the presidency of Barack Obama, China was actually viewed favorably in the US. The US also viewed Chinese production in Shenzhen and other places as being fundamental to the international industrial production chains.
What changed? In my opinion, two things happened. First, Chinese technological developments threatened the technological power of Western companies. For instance, Huawei started to make phones. If Huawei makes phones that are as good as Western phones, such as Apple, and if they're cheaper, they certainly threaten the market of Western companies. Chinese firms are producing as good, if not better technology, as that in the West and at a cheaper price. This is a great market threat. The West attempts to roll back China's technological developments.
The US government started to say Huawei might threaten its security. But there was no proof. That was one genuine threat to Western capital - China had actually attained a kind of technological parity or near parity with Western technological developments.
Secondly, especially after the financial crisis of 2007-08, China and Europe began to enhance cooperation, and many Central and Eastern Europe countries signed the Memorandum of Understanding on the Belt and Road Initiative and Italy also joined the Belt and Road Initiative. For these two reasons: advances in Chinese technology and the historical integration of Eurasia, the US has accelerated a pressure campaign against China.
GT: The West has also fabricated the "China threat theory," attempting to isolate China on a global scale. Will the West achieve its intent?
Prashad: I think that it's a very serious question.
First, I think China needs to acknowledge that in terms of the information struggle, it is much weaker than the West. For instance, Western media companies saturate news coverage in much of the third world. It's through Reuters, Associated Press, CNN, Fox News and so on. A lot of their ideas are refracted through world news. Chinese media coverage doesn't have the same kind of role as the Western media coverage. This has to do with the West's hundreds of years of colonialism.
Second, we already have evidence now that people in other parts of the world no longer really fully believe what is coming out of the US on Ukraine. Many African countries, many Asian countries, and many Latin American countries are unwilling to follow along with the US storyline regarding Ukraine.
There's a shift in the mood, but that's not enough. I feel that Chinese diplomacy had been very quiet until recently. What is China's theory of what's happening in Africa? What's China's theory of what's happening in the US? These are not clear to people, but you had a Western theory about what's happening in China and a Western theory about what's happening in India.
We need to acknowledge the fact that in the information struggle, the West remains very powerful. It's capable of driving an agenda. Take the case of the eradication of absolute poverty. Why wasn't this front-page news in every poor country in the world? Why not? The West media said that China is not honest about the numbers and that suddenly influenced the story, because they have the capacity to drive an information war.
GT: Some are still hyping up the "China collapse" theory. In your opinion, does China's political and economic model have vitality? Are you optimistic about China's future?
Prashad: The West has carried out a major pressure campaign against Russia and China. However, rather than seeing either Russia or China demonstrate the lines of collapse, we have seen huge partisanship or rather divisions in the US, enormous divisions between the US and Europe, like between France and the US, and enormous divisions within Europe. This is catastrophic. I think what's important is to caution the West to cease this pressure campaign, because rather than seeing the collapse of China or Russia, it's going to actually itself collapse.
We don't want the West to collapse in a catastrophic way because that could lead to all kinds of terrible conflicts.
GT: The West sees China as a "one-party authoritarian" state. What do you think about such a view? What's your take on the differences between the West and China in terms of democracy and political systems? Will history prove which one is better?
Prashad: Fortunately, for us, the question isn't which one is better, but whether we will in different ways be able to attain better kinds of democracy. Again, we are all experimenting with how to get more voices heard. This is a constant struggle in any system.
For most societies, not absolute monarchies, a representational government is needed. But even in absolute monarchies, there is some form of representational government. The question is, how your representation is chosen. Most societies have decided to have elections of different kinds. In fact, I would say that the processes of selecting representatives in China and in the US are not actually different in kind. They are different in degree.
I don't understand why there is so much talk of democracy versus authoritarian. In fact, what I see is different forms of representational politics where people are struggling to create better democracies. We're all struggling. How can a country like the US pretend that it has the best system when the majority of women in the US want the right to choose whether or not to have an abortion, but a small number of people in a supreme court say that, no, you can't have it? How is that democratic?
We're all struggling with democracy. We need a little more humility in the world, frankly. The question requires humility, not so much debate on democracy versus authoritarian. That's just noise.
GT: Over the past decade, how has China influenced the global order? What contributions will China make in the future?
Prashad: Now, the greatest impact that we see from China is that it has actually joined many multilateral bodies in order to provide better democratization for international relations. Now China is a key part of the BRICS, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), key part of stability in Eurasia.
I think at least after the financial crisis of 2007-08, China's biggest difference has been the willingness to be involved in building a global democracy. I think it is an immense advance, because China is a powerful country in terms of its internal strength, its own advances that it has made. It's a shining light for poor people around the world.
The entry of China in attempting to democratize the world system has been long overdue and I'm so glad to see China's active participation on behalf of the poorer people of the world, because it provides a counterweight to some of the Western countries that negotiate on behalf of the richer people.
GT: The Communist Party of China (CPC) is leading the Chinese people on a new journey toward realizing the second centenary goal. What experience can other countries learn from the CPC governance ?
Prashad: It's difficult to learn from a socialist experiment like China, because only a few countries remain which had a genuine socialist revolutionary process, Vietnam, China and Cuba.
But I think one of the main features that can be learned is the lack of rigidity of the thinking in China. That's why I use the word experiment. You must always understand Marxism creatively. Creative Marxism is the source of our advances while rigidity is our death. You must never lose your principles. And I think that's the very important lesson.
What Chinese President Xi Jinping put on the table is the importance of the principles of socialism. And young people need to engage both the principles of Marxism creatively and experimentation. I very much hope that in the institutes of Marxist studies across China, people are able to understand the power of experimentation and to see when we allow human creativity to flourish, we can solve problems.
